Oh well can't win them all. I really thought SpyHunter4k would have rated higher than it did. Of course, Dave and I approached it from the wrong viewpoint--how much can we squeeze into 4k. We were trying to be as close to the arcade version as we could, same screen size, same sprites and didn't focus on playability at all. It wasn't until after we sumbitted that we realized that if we had quatered the graphics we could have added more of the original game play.

In creating the game we came up with three new techniques of byte saving that none of the other games use. For that alone we are proud of what we submitted.

I just wish more people would have recognized the technical achievements for what they were.

In creating the game we came up with three new techniques of byte saving that none of the other games use. For that alone we are proud of what we submitted.

I just wish more people would have recognized the technical achievements for what they were.

I have to say, if there's one take-away lesson I've gotten from the 4K competition over the years, it's this: It's not about the technology.

The technology is merely a means to an end. If it helps you make a better game, then it's worth investing in. However, if your game becomes nothing more than the technology, it will fail.

The reason why I find this to be such an important lesson, is that it also holds true in the commercial game market. There are tons of games that use technologically impressive engines. Yet, unless they back it up with a complete game that jumps out and grabs you for hours at a time, they will fail to make inroads into the market. Just look at some of the all-time classic games for an example of this. Street Fighter can't hold a candle to Soul Caliber's technology, but which game do you think players remember more fondly? If you place Kameo: Elements of Power and Super Mario Bros. in front of someone, how many will chose to play Super Mario Bros.?

When it comes down to it, it's just so amazingly important to realize how little the technology actually matters to how people perceive a game. It may be frustrating to us technologists, but it's just the nature of the beast. Not all is lost, though. Feel free to discuss your improvements that made SpyHunter4K possible. I think you'll find that accolades from your fellow programmers are some of the highest honors you can get for your technological solutions.

EDIT: BTW, aren't there a few games missing from the final lineup? I could have sworn that there was a 3D Poker Game in the competition.

I noticed that the bulk of the games ended up very near a score of 80... with very little difference in the scores.

I placed about were I figured by rank, better than I expected by score out of 100 though.

The judges comments are very interesting, really shows the differences in taste. I am honestly quite surprized that my Kung Fu game score lower than my Bungie Bill game. I thought the kung fu game was way more playable and having single and two player modes might have given it an extra point or two. Just wish I had the time to fill up those extra bytes. Blocking and high/low hits were planned but I just didn't have the time to deal with it. And yes, my sctick figure graphics were even bad for stick figures

Overall I think my games got a fair rating, but next time I see a game review with a score of 8 out of 10 I know that the game is 'average' at best

I really enjoyed this competition. I agree with jbanes, the gameplay is more important than the tech (I spent too many bytes on tech and not enough on gameplay methinks).

I noticed that different judges gave different spreads in their scoring. Some folks seldom (if ever) gave a score below 60, while others gave scores over the full range available. This does tend to increase the score weighting of judges who use the whole range available (as was seen in the cases with a close to zero score). Perhaps next year, we could have a scoring guide for judges, to try to make the scoring spread more consistant. Or maybe just rate the games in order (a bit like the Eurovision song contest). Or perhaps, continue as now, but normalise each judges scores (takes some maths) before summing them up. What do people think? Maybe we could work out a generic scoring system in advance of the next competition.

Finally, I'd like to thank all the judges. I really appreciated some of the detailed comments on my entries. Hopefully these will help me make better entries next year

Edit: From JSquares, "shelton (+50): didn't play, took too long for the extra components to install."

Does anyone know what he might be talking about? As far as I can tell, the game doesn't do anything that might require special components.

As the author of JSquares, I can say definitively that there are no special components that install, so I have no idea what he's talking about. I'ts pure java, self-contiained in the jar. Maybe WebStart tried to update something and that took too long? Certainly wasn't the game itself.

Response to: "nonnus29 (+63): This game didn't make any sense, I think the ai was cheating..." nope, no AI cheating, just a good algorithm

I'll try to include better instructions next year, if I resubmit with more features.

As for my attempt at a Hold 'Em game, maybe I'll get it working for next year.

Thanks to all the judges your comments were great. The entries were outstanding this year.

ChrisM, thanks for the comment on my Ladybug game. I was ok with the position that it placed in the competition, tied for 10th in score but 11th in postion. Guess I will need to make games that sort higher in the alphabet.

But I was surprized at what games beat it, and at what games it beat. It looks like there is no consideration as to how much was squezeed into a game. Some very simple games made it to the top, while some very complex games were way down. Looks like you need a game that has very simple controls and that gives a game over in about 30 secs. This way it becomes what the judges call "addictive", That is, I surely can do better than 30 secs.

Of course none of these comments apply to Miner a great example of what a 4K game should be. I certainly thought it deserved to win.

Congrats to all the entries. The best J4K yet. Can't wait till next year.

Edit: From JSquares, "shelton (+50): didn't play, took too long for the extra components to install."

Does anyone know what he might be talking about? As far as I can tell, the game doesn't do anything that might require special components.

As the author of JSquares, I can say definitively that there are no special components that install, so I have no idea what he's talking about. I'ts pure java, self-contiained in the jar. Maybe WebStart tried to update something and that took too long? Certainly wasn't the game itself.

<j2se version="1.4"/> should be <j2se version="1.4+"/>as if you have1.5 installed, it will install 1.4. grr.

<j2se version="1.4"/> should be <j2se version="1.4+"/>as if you have1.5 installed, it will install 1.4. grr.

Ah, yes, that explains a similar problem I've experienced - I have 1.4.2 installed, and a work app has 1.4.1 as its j2se version, so it installs JRE 1.4.1. Now I know, so in the future I will be sure to do it correctly.

<j2se version="1.4"/> should be <j2se version="1.4+"/>as if you have1.5 installed, it will install 1.4. grr.

The target JVM for this contest was 1.4. I certainly would hope that the judge was using a 1.4 JVM for testing. Otherwise we would have some definite problems with the judging on our hands.

The rules said it must run on 1.4.. but were ambiguous at best if it meant ONLY 1.4. I interpreted that to mean that any release-version JRE that was at least 1.4 might be used for testing... since I think that is the most practical situation to expect of end users.

I still play games on the list that are in the top 30 You don't have to be #1 to be good. There are still great games on the whole list, but I do feel the games are reasonably well sorted. Those in the top 10 deserve to be top 10, those in top 20 deserve to be top 20. That sort of thing. Even top 5 is PRETTY close to what I feel the majority feels, although a few got bounced out as has been discussed

java-gaming.org is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites,
and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily
gaming and game production oriented community.
inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the
company managing the website of java‑gaming.org